TAILIEUCHUNG - Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 11 P50

Gale Encyclopedia of American Law Volume 11 P50 fully illuminates today's leading cases, major statutes, legal terms and concepts, notable persons involved with the law, important documents and more. Legal issues are fully discussed in easy-to-understand language, including such high-profile topics as the Americans with Disabilities Act, capital punishment, domestic violence, gay and lesbian rights, physician-assisted suicide and thousands more. | MILESTONES IN THE LAW KELO V. CITY OF NEW LONDON 477 scrutiny in favor of affording legislatures broad latitude in determining what public needs justify the use of the takings power. IV Those who govern the City were not confronted with the need to remove blight in the Fort Trumbull area but their determination that the area was sufficiently distressed to justify a program of economic rejuvenation is entitled to our deference. The City has carefully formulated an economic development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community including-but by no means limited to-new jobs and increased tax revenue. As with other exercises in urban planning and development 12 the City is endeavoring to coordinate a variety of commercial residential and recreational uses of land with the hope that they will form a whole greater than the sum of its parts. To effectuate this plan the City has invoked a state statute that specifically authorizes the use of eminent domain to promote economic development. Given the comprehensive character of the plan the thorough deliberation that preceded its adoption and the limited scope of our review it is appropriate for us as it was in Berman to resolve the challenges of the individual owners not on a piecemeal basis but rather in light of the entire plan. Because that plan unquestionably serves a public purpose the takings challenged here satisfy the public use requirement of the Fifth Amendment. To avoid this result petitioners urge us to adopt a new bright-line rule that economic development does not qualify as a public use. Putting aside the unpersuasive suggestion that the City s plan will provide only purely economic benefits neither precedent nor logic supports petitioners proposal. Promoting economic development is a traditional and long-accepted function of government. There is moreover no principled way of distinguishing economic development from the other public purposes that we have recognized. In our cases .

Đã phát hiện trình chặn quảng cáo AdBlock
Trang web này phụ thuộc vào doanh thu từ số lần hiển thị quảng cáo để tồn tại. Vui lòng tắt trình chặn quảng cáo của bạn hoặc tạm dừng tính năng chặn quảng cáo cho trang web này.